text:
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Irvine Barnes & Noble, 7/25/2007
The science section is tiny, only two small aisles three shelves high, but it doesn't take long to come across a miscategorized book - and it wasn't what I expected. God is not Great by the celebrity atheist Christopher Hitchens.
Seeing as my aim is to re-shelve religion and/or philosophy books to the correct part of the store, I am duty-bound to act. This is a book on atheism from a non-scientist, and it simply does not belong in the science section. Science is a secular process and has nothing to do with the question of the existence, or the non-existence, of a God. It is thus relocated to the Philosophy shelves upstairs. "But what about Dawkins?!" I hear you cry. Dawkins is another well-known atheist, I agree, but he is best known as an evolutionary biologist and his books are strongly evolution-themed.
Let's see what else we can find.
I think I might have picked a bad week to start this quest. Behe's new book must have been just released:
Four copies of The Edge of Evolution were discovered once more in the science section.
I flip a copy and read the back. Here's the beginning of the first quote from the back cover: "Until the past decade and the genomics revolution, Darwin's theory rested on indirect evidence and reasonable speculation..." (Dr. Philip Skell, Evan Pugh Professor of Chemistry, Emeritus, at Pennsylvania State University, and member of the National Academy of Sciences). That's not true! I am emboldened by this bare-faced lie from this well-respected elderly chemist, pick up all four copies, and stroll upstairs.
Now, I aim for accuracy in my recategorization, and I was still slightly mad at the lies on the back cover (read the "Editorial Reviews" at Amazon for a sampling), so I sought out the most appropriate section of the store:
Behe's lie-covered volume now rightly resides in the Religious Fiction section (click on the image to see the label). A job well done.
Since the puny science section carried very few science books, there wasn't much other opportunity for other mistakes on behalf of Barnes & Noble. After finishing browsing science, I went to browse the expansive Religion department and got a nice suprise:
A book by Lee Strobel called The Case for a Creator. This book claims to be a scientific investigation on evidence that points to God's existence, and it is shelved correctly in Religion. As I was saying, science is secular, but that doesn't mean it cannot inform people's religion, just as science can inform people's atheism. In fact, it can do this because its a secular process.
How did Barnes & Noble do? Pathetically small science section, the usual Behe books, a non-science atheism book. Not so great. Picked up points with the Strobel book though.
~ Ste
84 comments:
- Shelley said...
Thanks for fighting the good fight Ste. I'm gonna help spread the word. :)
- July 27, 2007 at 10:38 PM
- maundering gadabout said...
Twofold: One, I like the idea of leaving a note for the bookstore clerks. And two, man, let folks post comments!
- July 28, 2007 at 1:35 AM
- maundering gadabout said...
Two comments:
One, I like the idea of leaving a note for the bookstore clerks -- the point is education after all, right?
Two, let folks post! I was hoping to see some crazy 8-page post by Behe himself, but he must not have a google account. - July 28, 2007 at 1:36 AM
- Ste said...
I considered the note idea, it is a good one, I agree. However I feel conspicuous enough strolling about bookstores with a stack of six pseudoscience books, looking for the religion section. To then whip out a small stack of notes and carefully place them in each book would just make me stick out more. Maybe I'll give it a go next time.
People can post comments. I moderated them because I do not want *another* evolution vs. creation debate blog. There are plenty of places for that on the internets. This is about book reclassification, and what constitutes science.
Also, when people post the same basic thing twice, it enables me to only publish one of them. ;) - July 28, 2007 at 8:02 AM
- Engranon said...
Excellent! I thought I was the only one who ever reshelved books at the bookstore. Count me in as an Engineer helping the fight in SoCal.
- July 28, 2007 at 8:40 AM
- Jacqueline Passey said...
I love you.
- July 28, 2007 at 8:47 AM
- Ethical Mirth Gas said...
I think you misunderstand the whole bookstore categories thing. Bookstores =/= Libraries.
Filing of books in bookstores has nothing to do with the bookstore trying to make a pronouncement about the book's contents and everything to do with the bookstore trying to wave books in front of the people the bookstore thinks are most likely to buy them.
If the bookstore folks thought they could sell more copies of Origin of the Species by shelving it with the Harlequin Romance Novels, they would. - July 28, 2007 at 9:17 AM
- shandon said...
Thank you, ethical mirth gas. As a longtime bookstore employee, I can confirm that, when deciding where to shelve books, the thought foremost in booksellers' minds is, "Will this book sell from this spot?" At my bookstore, we attempt to shelve books where we think customers who don't want to ask for help in finding things will spot them.
Moving books to another section of the store is not "helping" or "making a statement"; it is making a mess. It makes finding a book much harder for the employee who has looked it up in the computer because it's not where it's supposed to be. It means the possibility of a lost sale because the book cannot be found, at least for the moment. It means more work for already underpaid sales clerks to have to move the books back to where they originally were -- because, rest assured, that's what will probably happen.
A friendly email to the manager or buyers at your local bookstore, suggesting changes and your reasons why, would probably have a greater lasting effect. While I appreciate what you're trying to do, I think you're going about it in the wrong way. - July 28, 2007 at 10:46 AM
- Carson. said...
I'm with shandon on this one. Emailing or letter-writing is a decent idea. Even better, as long as you're going to the stores why don't you just talk to the people working in them? If someone came up to me with a stack of Hitchens' book and said "I found these in the science section" I'd say "Oh shi! I'll put them in the Atheism section where they belong, and make sure the category code is changed."
- July 28, 2007 at 11:18 AM
- brandi said...
I agree with ethical mirth gas.. things are put into places will they will sell.
To walk into a bookstore and start reshelving is a little more than rude. I work at a bookstore, and it's true - you are just creating more mess. You aren't getting through to ANYONE that way. We get pompous customers in all the time who think that if they turn the cover of some political book that they don't agree with around, they are making a statement. When truthfully, all they are accomplishing is annoying some bookseller who has to fix the mess you made.
You would do much better to write a letter. - July 28, 2007 at 4:39 PM
- Joe said...
They are likely categorized accord to Library of Congress classifications.
You might want to start there. - July 28, 2007 at 5:30 PM
- Doc said...
Keep up the good fight!
- July 28, 2007 at 9:18 PM
- Ste said...
A little clarification is needed, I think.
I'm not really aiming to educate just the customers who just happen to be in the religion/new age section of bookstores. I'm not really reclassifying books for the sake of accuracy.
I am aiming to write a light-hearted blog that addresses the serious issue of the lack of science awareness in society: Science has been abused by extremist religion, business, and right-wing politics. So much so that the public cannot discern what science is and is not anymore. I mean, lots of people actually believe that evolution does not happen!
I understand the criticisms posted recently. However, if a few books get moved to another part of a store and a few people get an inkling of what science actually is from reading this blog, then it is worth it.
Yeah, yeah, maybe I'm being idealistic here, but with this blog I am performing a public service.
~ Ste - July 28, 2007 at 11:06 PM
- Ithaca said...
Well, it's nice of booksellers to do their best to help the clueless customer who won't ask but just blunders about the store looking hopefully in what might be a relevant section. Does this mean B&N have put all the serious science books in a part of the store unguessed-at by all the idiot savants who are interested in science and look for books on the subject in the science section?
All the irate booksellers are really telling us is: look, the science section is tiny because we KNOW nobody is interested in science. If we HAVE to take a gamble and have a science section, let's at least redeem it by putting books there that will appeal to the sort of person who has no interest in science -- this being the only sort of person clueless enough to look for such a book in the science section anyway.
I can't help feeling that a bad science section can only confirm a bookseller's conviction that no one buys books on science: no one interested in the subject, knowing what's on offer, will bother to look in the section after a first visit.
Anyway, if they are cunningly filing Lang's Astrophysical Formulae among the books on astrology I hope they leave a note to this effect in Science. - July 29, 2007 at 6:34 AM
- Barrett said...
i'm not a biologist, professional, amateur, or otherwise, but i'm going to start helping bookstores too, dammit!
to all the book clerk critics: don't tell me you wouldn't crack a smile when you find behe filed under "new age." have a sense of humor, and civic duty! - July 29, 2007 at 8:23 PM
- Dave said...
You, sir, are amazing. I wonder if your assistance wouldn't be useful at the local public library as well.
- July 29, 2007 at 8:42 PM
- Scott said...
You say that you are "aiming to write a light-hearted blog that addresses the serious issue of the lack of science awareness in society..." I agree with this issue, and commend your wanting to fix it. However, you could accomplish the same task by writing letters and promoting a blog where your bookstore research can be found. Moving books around only annoys customers who cannot find the book they are looking for, and makes more work for employees who aren't even part of the process that decides where these books go. Stick to the writing and the notes, but stop causing more work for people who can't do anything about this.
- July 29, 2007 at 9:56 PM
- William Mericle said...
Here's one for you:
I once bought an academic string theory textbook in the physics section of Borders.
Should it have been in the physics section (despite being still untested), the math section (my personal hunch), or the philosophy/religion section (the preference of some well known physicists? - July 30, 2007 at 12:58 AM
- Madeleine said...
The thing is, objectors, most people are ignorant about science, and a significant proportion of book sales, I wager, are as gifts. If one of these ignorant people bought a book they believed to be about science, for someone who they knew liked science, and it turned out to be non-scientific, then that's a bit of a disappointment for the recipient of the book. Similarly, when I go to a boats or car section to find a book for someone I probably don't know well, it would be disappointing to find out later that the book I chose was instead about boat illustration or how to make car-shaped cakes. Granted, the distinctions here are probably easier to make, but that's just it - for those who are less able to distinguish between science and non-science, permitting the blurring of this distinction isn't helping.
- July 30, 2007 at 1:16 AM
- Arun said...
Should books be categorized into groups that most people find it easier to pick up from? Someone looking for a non-fiction work with 'evolution' in it's title might look up 'Science' first and not be bothered about the exact category it goes into.
- July 30, 2007 at 2:29 AM
- John Mark Rozendaal said...
I admire what you are doing - mostly.
However I do not agree with your definition of science. You say that science is a "secular" pursuit, and therefore "god" is not a proper subject for scientific inquiry. I thought that science was not defined as a category of topics but as a method of handling knowledge.
If it were possible to gather data about a "god," data that sould be reproducible, observable by more than one researcher; if it were possible to deduce from that data a reasoned theory about the existence or non-existence of God; if that theory could be challenged or supported by subsequent data collection or experimintation - wouldn't that be science?
Books on "intelligent design" deal with the question of the origin of the species. They are not science NOT because of the topic that they treat. They are not science, (or at least not good science) because they use selective bits of the data to support improbable theories which have not proven to be predictive. (It is a mark of a strong theorem that it is strongly and correctly predictive of the results of subsequent data collection. I don't know of any theorem involving a god that has ever predicted anything. )
Secular, schmecular, sacred schmacred. Why not leave those specious distinctious to the religionists? - July 30, 2007 at 3:13 AM
- John Mark Rozendaal said...
I actually read Christopher Hitchens' angry screed, "God is Not Great." I heartily agree with the premiss, 'tho I did not like the book. What I got out of it is this: the real philosophical problem of the twentieth century is not the problem of "god" nor the problem of "conduct." The essential problem is the question of knowledge, how we know what we know.
Forget Darwin. If more of our leaders, educators, and friends in Asia and Africa could be borught up to speed on Francis Bacon, THEN we would be getting somewhere. - July 30, 2007 at 3:21 AM
- dahamsta said...
Brilliant idea, well done. However I disagree about Dawkins, assuming the book in question was The God Delusion or similar. Your points about him are correct, but his books are surely still very much opinion? I think ye should be consistent if ye want to be taken seriously. Don't go down the Michael Moore road and leave yourselves open to criticism.
- July 30, 2007 at 3:43 AM
- Dan said...
Great blog! I have been isnpired to spend a day out with friends, drinking book store coffee and helping the stores out in return.
- July 30, 2007 at 4:22 AM
- Warren said...
I like this idea. To take it personally as an affront to bookstores or their employees is to ignore the minor social sabotaging that is a longstanding tradition of intellectual dissent.
If one less person can locate, buy, read and be deluded by Behe, that's a very good thing.
It's even better if his foolish drivel is found shelved among the blatherings of Ramtha, where it belongs.
Damn the torpedoes; full speed ahead. - July 30, 2007 at 8:25 AM
- datamuse said...
They are likely categorized accord to Library of Congress classifications.
You might want to start there.
They certainly are not. Most bookstores don't use library classification schemes, at least not in the United States. B&N, like most bookstores, likely uses BISAC, and deviates from it when it suits them.
Check this yourself using any library catalog. The Hitchens, for example, is right in the religion category where it belongs.
To take it personally as an affront to bookstores or their employees is to ignore the minor social sabotaging that is a longstanding tradition of intellectual dissent.
The problem is that the bookstore employees don't know this. All they know is that someone keeps moving the books around and making more work for them. How about getting them on your side and making them allies in your dissent? How about making stock suggestions for GOOD science books? How about TALKING to them, for heaven's sake? You never know...you might well persuade them to move those books of their own accord. The books will be in their proper places and the bookstore employees won't be annoyed. Everybody wins. - July 30, 2007 at 10:36 AM
- Ian B Gibson said...
Filing of books in bookstores has nothing to do with the bookstore trying to make a pronouncement about the book's contents and everything to do with the bookstore trying to wave books in front of the people the bookstore thinks are most likely to buy them.
But then it doesn't make sense for Behe's books to be shelved in the science section - nobody who is interested in science is likely to read anything Behe writes - so by reshelving his books in the New Age or religion sections, we are actually doing Behe a favour - some of those types of people might actually buy a copy. - July 30, 2007 at 11:54 AM
- DaveX said...
Damn, this is the kind of crap that makes me really hate people. Doesn't anyone see that this is just the same annoying, anal, nit-picky behavior of the Fundamentalists? I don't enjoy living with a bunch of folks who just nag each other for their entire lives, gloating over their miniature victories like reshelving books or dropping a tract that looks like a dollar tip at the restaurant.
Just go ahead, have a war, and get it over with. Call me when you're all done. - July 30, 2007 at 12:45 PM
- soforth said...
Ah, quite good. However, this type of ignorant classification is not quite as frustrating to me as the entire section labeled "metaphysics" in many book stores. I am a philosophy grad, and to see that word so degraded (its the new word for 'new age') is painful. How do I go about re-naming a whole section?
- July 30, 2007 at 12:59 PM
- Jessican said...
Thanks for creating more work for those of us that work for pennies at the aforementioned bookstore. Now I get to go to work and move all of those books back to where they belong.
Seriously though, if you have a problem with a book' classification, B&N has an internal process for moving books to different categories. Let us know (via letter, email, phone call, or just a conversation with an available bookseller) and we can submit a request for reclassification.
The next time you feel like using your revolutionary tactics in such a manner...please, just don't. You just make my job less enjoyable than it already is. If you seriously want to see change then try the options listed above.
Also, as a sidenote the Hitchens book is supposed to be shelved in Philosophy, so that store you visited actually did shelve it in the wrong place according to corporate standards. - July 30, 2007 at 1:25 PM
- KevinBBG said...
Good work, Ste. You are even helping out the bookstore because the kind of person who wants a Behe book wouldn't go near the science section but probably frequents the Religion section. I might even start doing this myself.
- July 30, 2007 at 1:34 PM
- The Factician said...
You've set yourself a Herculean task. That said, could I request on your next trip to remove Hulda Clark's books about cancer from the Health section, and move them to the New Age section? They're often found right in the cancer section.
More about Hulda Clark here. In brief, she's a nut who thinks all cancer is caused by flatworms, and that you can cure yourself using a device that is essentially a 9-volt battery that you use to shock yourself. Her books are disturbingly common in the health/cancer section of bookstores. - July 30, 2007 at 1:36 PM
- Goldstein said...
Say, thats a great idea!
Thanks for the tip.
As far a Hitchens, what does his rant have to do with philosophy?
Shouldn't it be under the section, "Bigotry"? - July 30, 2007 at 1:50 PM
- Ethical Mirth Gas said...
nobody who is interested in science is likely to read anything Behe writes - so by reshelving his books in the New Age or religion sections, we are actually doing Behe a favour - some of those types of people might actually buy a copy.
And I'm sure you're in a much better position to decide stuff like that then the stupid bookstore owners. Maybe you could just plan out the whole economy for us. I'm sure you know better than Dell how many computers this country *really* needs.
And when you're done, could you please see about censoring this stupid internet thing? All kinds of misinformation here. Maybe Google would hire you to weed out all the stuff from their indexes that you think is bogus? - July 30, 2007 at 2:02 PM
- James1123 said...
- This comment has been removed by the author.
- July 30, 2007 at 2:09 PM
- Larry said...
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one doing this.
- July 30, 2007 at 2:24 PM
- aichelux said...
I'm with the angry bookselling clerks.
You can have a "lighthearted" pranking that garners the occasional chuckle from people too self-important to go reorganizing their ideas about what science is anyway, or you can take your idea and actually do something effective.
If you attempt to attack Things Corporate by pinching the underpaid, and uninvested, front lines of employees, you're merely reinforcing the comfortable buffer zone between them and the people who can get things changed.
You have a point. Here's to hoping you find a way to actually *make* it. - July 30, 2007 at 2:58 PM
- Don said...
I work at a Barnes & Noble and I've been itching to do exactly that. Especially since, in addition to Behe, there are a few PIGs which seem to have wandered over from the religious fiction section...
- July 30, 2007 at 3:15 PM
- Gilles said...
Do the bookstores staff put the books back where they originally were ?
- July 30, 2007 at 4:18 PM
- Roonie Roo said...
Thank you! PZ linked to your wonderful post from Pharyngula. I know what my husband and I are doing this weekend. :)
- July 30, 2007 at 4:22 PM
- Kitsune Bi said...
You go around bragging about... making more work for folks, so that *you* can feel vindicated? How very selfish. Also irrational, if you're actually trying to change anyone's mind.
If you actually have a good argument, write it up-- make a nice little book and sell that. Don't go making folks work harder so that you get thrills.
Or is your next project a "light hearted" record of you stealing books and burning them? Oooh, maybe you can take a sharpie and scribble on the covers! Or rip out the pages? Better yet, stand on the street corner beside the store and preach at-- I mean educate-- everyone who walks in. - July 30, 2007 at 4:26 PM
- Michael said...
Ha, great site. I'm looking forward to seeing more.
- July 30, 2007 at 6:05 PM
- Liberatus said...
Hey, this reminds me of way back when I wasn't in primary school yet. One day I sorted all the books in my parents' bookshelf according to their colors: Red books to red books, blue books to blue books, yellow books to yellow books - that's the right way, isn't it? My Mom and Dad were less than conviced though...
- July 30, 2007 at 6:33 PM
- marty said...
I like all the concern trolls, popping up with their "oh noes, now the books ain't in the right spots!" line. Very droll.
I've heard that the placement of books is often paid for by the publisher as is the shelving, placement on display racks, prominence of location etc. I wonder if any of these not-science books are being subsidised for their placement within the science section.
On another note, there is an "Intelligent Design for Dummies" book, which I spotted in a local bookshop. Probably the most accurate title in the series. - July 30, 2007 at 7:21 PM
- Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...
Hey Marty-- at least we care more about people than complaining that bookstores don't cater to our personal taste.
- July 30, 2007 at 7:50 PM
- vargas said...
I think moving around books to suit your personal ideas as where they should be is about as silly as it gets.
Why don't you call that woman who's always trying to ban the Harry Potter books. I see you and her have something in common: irrational behavior. - July 30, 2007 at 9:33 PM
- Brian said...
A desperate and futile act by a passionate believer in a fading worldview. Don't you have anything better to do with your time?
Thanks for sharing. My opinion of darwinists is justifiably degraded. - July 30, 2007 at 10:26 PM
- Ste said...
"fading worldview"!
Simply superb. Like a scientific fact of life is going to go away because it doesn't gel nicely with fundamentalist views about what is and is not real.
Pssst! There's also these things called *atoms* you cannot see them but they're real.
~ Ste - July 30, 2007 at 10:32 PM
- Brian said...
Ste...It's called the "Theory of Evolution" unlike the "Law of Thermodynamics"; hardly a fact (been that way for nearly 150 years). Many call it a hypothesis.
Your impotent acts of book shifting illustrate the weakness of your position.
Try reading Behe's book. You'll find more science than the Dawkins philosophic rants that you think belong in the science section. - July 30, 2007 at 10:43 PM
- Ste said...
A "theory" is as good as it gets in science.
In science "theory" does NOT mean "speculation", as per the common usage of the word, but is rather an idea backed up by much empirical evidence from multiple sources.
Creationists have deliberately blurred the distinction between these two meanings of "theory" - successfully it seems.
Perhaps a dictionary is in order?
~ Ste - July 30, 2007 at 10:47 PM
- Brian said...
Ste...you're known as "Misshelver" at "post-darwinist dot blogspot dot com/2007/07/edge-of-evolution-misshelved-by-darwin.html" and described as "dim, warped, and petty". I agree.
- July 30, 2007 at 11:16 PM
- Ste said...
Ignorance on a subject is forgivable. Deliberate ignorance on a subject you are attempting to debate is not. Begone.
~ Ste - July 30, 2007 at 11:50 PM
- Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...
Pot, kettle, black. - July 31, 2007 at 12:25 AM
- mattghg said...
Thankfully, I got my copy online. I'm up to chapter six, and so far I have been badly misled into thinking all that stuff about mutation rates, amino acids, proteins, DNA, haemoglobin coding, red blood cell structure, malaria's MO, intraflagellar transport and fitness landscapes was anything at all to do with science. Good thing you're around to set me straight. Dr. Behe too. I'm sure he could use a science lesson from a bookstore employee.
- July 31, 2007 at 6:40 AM
- spencer said...
Also, as a sidenote the Hitchens book is supposed to be shelved in Philosophy, so that store you visited actually did shelve it in the wrong place according to corporate standards.
I think that's kind of the point . . . the "corporate standards" are wrong. Many people (including me) are somewhat skeptical of our ability to change corporate standards with a politely-worded letter. Hence, this blog.
Ste...It's called the "Theory of Evolution" unlike the "Law of Thermodynamics"; hardly a fact (been that way for nearly 150 years). Many call it a hypothesis.
And yet another ignoramus who doesn't understand the difference between the scientific and popular usages of the word "theory" - but insists on making comments like this one anyway.
As for the "many" who call evolution a hypothesis . . . how many of them are scientists, I wonder? I mean, I'm sure you call it that, but so what? I call (tonge in cheek) religion a mental illness - but that alone doesn't make it one. - July 31, 2007 at 7:09 AM
- Brian said...
Ye olde "deliberate ignorance" line...lol. Just because I don't buy into a logically stunted philosophy posing as science with nothing but pseudo-evidence and fraud to show after 100+ years.
Keep your religion to yourself and stop harassing bookstores. The only difference between you and the guys that paint their gang name on walls is they're more effective. - July 31, 2007 at 7:24 AM
- Abby said...
Hey look at this:
If someone else has linked you to this already, then please excuse me. I am in a bit of a rush today!! - July 31, 2007 at 1:26 PM
- Jason said...
Why do you find a book like Mike's so unsettling that you feel the need to indulge in this childish attempt at censorship ?
Surely if his claims are bunk then you have nothing to fear by people looking at his ideas and realizing this for themselves ?
Truth has nothing to fear from error, but error has everything to fear by being exposed to truth.
If you think you are right and have the truth and Mike is in error then why are you doing an excellent impression of someone who fears they are in error and wants to make sure nobody else catches on or is shown something that might show your error for what it is ?
And lest you complain that that is not what you are doing, well, that is the impression you give even if unintentionally.
And besides, why didn't you grow out of this sort of childish idiocy when you were 10 or 11. Unless you are 10 or 11 in which case, I apologise and feel free to keep it up. - July 31, 2007 at 10:01 PM
- Ste said...
"Mike"? You mean Behe? Are you two on first name terms?! Fantastic - tell him that science has nothing to do with God(s), and stop trying to lever his religion into it. Also ask him why none of his studies on evolution is in any of the primary research literature. It's interesting how none of this "science" of his has been peer-reviewed, eh?
His books are not unsettling, they are an affront to good science. And when they are found next to absolute, literal geniuses in the bookstore it is offensive.
Creationism only gets scary when fundamentalist Christians try to force their religious myths as scientific fact down our children's throats. A stand needs to be made well before that can happen again. And I might as well have a laugh along the way. Have a sense of humor, I'm saving your child's education.
~ Ste - August 1, 2007 at 1:05 AM
- Larry Fafarman said...
The surest way for Barnes & Noble to put a stop to these shenanigans is to put the book in the best-seller sections throughout the chain. And for good measure, they could add other pro-ID and anti-Darwinist books to the best-seller sections, e.g., Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, Icons of Evolution, and Traipsing Into Evolution. Then B & N could move the pro-Darwinist books to the fiction section. This reshelving problem will then be cured forever. I guarantee it.
- August 1, 2007 at 1:55 AM
- Larry Fafarman said...
In fact, I am going to call the Barnes & Noble store in Irvine and make this suggestion.
- August 1, 2007 at 2:00 AM
- Larry Fafarman said...
Also, you stupid fathead, you are going to start a reshelving war, with Darwinist books being reshelved in other sections. Two can play this game. I demand that you cease and desist immediately.
- August 1, 2007 at 7:43 AM
- Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...
Ste- Publishing a book is "shoving it down our children's throats"?
The problem with peer review is the witch hunt that goes out if anyone is *suspected* of sympathy with ID-- now, if stuff were allowed to be publish and then *logically* torn apart, that would indicate that there are flaws.
When someone blocks stuff from being published, then insists that means that there is a problem with the theory because it was not published... well, that is something else. - August 1, 2007 at 3:27 PM
- Ste said...
No, but using political office to force your personal religion as scientific fact in schools is. I was saying we need to make it VERY clear what is science and what is pseudo-scientific junk before it gets to the stage when certain religious groups start trying to brainwash children.
Anyone can publish a book - and that's kind of the point. EVERY SINGLE PAPER submitted to peer-review IS logically torn apart. Doing an end-run around the scientific process does not help your cause. The peer-review process would not accept ID, not because of some grand conspiracy, but because the supernatural is not an explanation that is acceptable to science.
Look, ID is an interesting concept. It's a pretty fun, cool idea. I mean, God could be the cause of every single mutation that is the raw material for selection - and even if this was the actual truth of the universe, science would have NOTHING to say on the matter. It would still search for naturalistic reasons for why these mutations are happening. Science cannot detect the supernatural. This is why there are a ton of devout, religious scientists out there perfect at peace with the world - and plenty of devout, religious people with no problem with evolution (including the Pope, it seems: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/).
I'm not saying that ID is not the truth, just that it is not science.
So go ahead and believe in your Intelligent Design, just don't expect people to take it seriously as a scientific concept.
~ Ste - August 1, 2007 at 3:47 PM
- Jason said...
"His books are not unsettling, they are an affront to good science. And when they are found next to absolute, literal geniuses in the bookstore it is offensive."
You don't have a right not to be offended. A store does have a right not to have to endure this petty vandalism.
But more than that, you behavior and attempts at censorship give the impression you are scared of the book and don't want people reading it because they might get hetrodox ideas.
And frankly, deny it all you want, actions speak far far louder than words in this sort of thing. - August 1, 2007 at 5:05 PM
- Ste said...
Ok. I'll make it clear for you.
I am drawing a distinct line between science and nonscience. I feel like it is an important one to make.
That's it.
~ Ste - August 1, 2007 at 5:11 PM
- Larry Fafarman said...
The store management did not put these books in the science section to make a statement -- the management put them there to try to sell them. Who are you to question the management's judgment?
The Edge of Evolution is much more likely to sell in the science section than in the "religious fiction" section. - August 1, 2007 at 7:47 PM
- Jason said...
"Ok. I'll make it clear for you.
I am drawing a distinct line between science and nonscience. I feel like it is an important one to make."
Yes i'm sure you believe that. That is not what your actions communicate though. Your actions communicate fear and a desire to censor that which challenges your personal dogma.
You can say whatever you like, but your actions communicate a different message, even if that is not the message you intend to communicate. - August 1, 2007 at 9:38 PM
- Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...
Ste- we see you making a statement. At the expense of others. And then throwing your arm out to pat yourself on the back.
We are not impressed. - August 1, 2007 at 9:49 PM
- Ste said...
"Who are you to question the management's judgment?"
Pay attention. I'm a biologist.
"Yes i'm sure you believe that. That is not what your actions communicate though..."
*Yawn* You've already made up your mind and no conversation or evidence to the contrary will change it. At least your behavior is consistent.
Just to let you know, scientists laugh at this creationist BS. They find it genuinely funny. Fear is the last thing on our minds - until the religion starts to be pushed into science classes.
"We are not impressed"
You are so far from being saved, there's no point in trying. You are not the target of my escapades.
Geez people, have a sense of humor. - August 1, 2007 at 10:14 PM
- Jason said...
"*Yawn* You've already made up your mind and no conversation or evidence to the contrary will change it. At least your behavior is consistent."
Hey make an arse of yourself and communicate to people that you are afraid of Mike's book.
I encourage this behavior on your part because it certainly communicates a message I have no problem with you communicating. - August 1, 2007 at 10:24 PM
- chemriot said...
I am a chemist and I find the issue of published science to be an interesting one. People who do not have a scientific background rely on certain classifications, warning labels, statistical analyses, etc., to help them make decisions as to what is credible. Fortunately in the arena of scientific writing we have peer-reviewed journals that aim to ensure the distribution of rigorously tested information. However, with books distributed for commercial gain, there is very little discernment of this sort. We readily accept that a novel will not necessarily tell us the truth, because it is labeled "fiction", but a book labeled "science" leads us to believe we will be getting factual information. I firmly believe that these "pseudo-science" books have no place in the "science" section due to the fact that people will take them as such. This is dangerous. Imagine a book condoning smoking while pregnant or describing the benefits of leaches instead of blood transfusions being shelved in modern "medical" sections!
As to the previous complaints about causing more work for bookstore employees, I have a comment: I worked in a video store for 5 years and people would constantly put things back in the wrong places, sometimes accidentally and sometimes out of sheer laziness. But occasionally we would find Donald Duck videos mixed in with the "soft porn" section and due to the consistency of their cartoon preferences, I am fairly certain it was intentional. Now, whether or not they ardently believed that duck was sexy and seriously took issue with our organization system is up for debate, but it did give us quite a chuckle every time we had to re-shelve it. My overlong point is that compared to the myriad hours re-shelving due to stupid laziness on the part of the customers, the few minutes spent as the result of the prank were no big deal and often a source of much-needed amusement. I agree with Ste: get a damn sense of humor! - August 2, 2007 at 3:35 PM
- Jason said...
"I firmly believe that these "pseudo-science" books have no place in the "science" section due to the fact that people will take them as such"
Well yeah, but for some reason they keep shelving all this drivel by Dawkins and others in the science section.
I also like your implicit, "but think of the children" cry. Nothing like appealing to "saving the children" to justify censorship. - August 2, 2007 at 10:43 PM
- Amanda said...
To everyone complaining that this (humorous approach to a phenomenon disgracing scientists and humans throughout bookstores) is making more work for the employees: more work = more jobs.
I think you are doing a double service for our fellow earthlings!! - August 4, 2007 at 12:27 AM
- Larry Fafarman said...
Amanda said...
>>>>> To everyone complaining that this (humorous approach to a phenomenon disgracing scientists and humans throughout bookstores) is making more work for the employees: more work = more jobs. <<<<<
This misshelving might not only result in a lost sale when the book cannot be found, but could also result in a lost customer. One of the main reasons why people still buy books at bookstores instead of buying books online is that books can be thoroughly examined before purchase at a bookstore. - August 4, 2007 at 3:41 PM
- Eric said...
Well, you can leave as many notes as you want but you're wasting your time. The company has those books listed in those sections in their national inventory computer and when the bookseller's go through their section and scan each title (as they are supposed to do everyday), the PDT computer will inform the associate that the book belongs in science and not religion. Whilst I disagree with this, unfortunately the publisher has categorized those titles as science and B&N must adhere.
Your best bet would be to send a letter to their headquarters in New York City. More specifically to the buyer who keeps up the store's inventory of those particular titles. It'll probably be the science book buyer, or some similar title.
Hope that helps,
-E - August 27, 2007 at 10:39 AM
- Barb said...
I have just posted 2 petitions in support of this very effort!
The first petition is for scientists (the experts on what science is and what science is not) can be found at:
The second petition is for non-scientists who support removing id books from science shelves can be found at:
One of the signees send me your blog. Wahoo! - September 16, 2007 at 12:50 PM
- Ste said...
Thanks Barb, I'll make sure these get linked from an upcoming post.
~ Ste - September 19, 2007 at 12:37 AM
- annoyed b&n staffer said...
- This comment has been removed by the author.
- November 10, 2007 at 9:32 PM
- annoyed b&n staffer said...
i work for b&n and have to tell you that booksellers are not responsible for deciding where the books go. that is decided upon by the publishers and book buyers at the home office in new york. don't be one of those know-it-all customers who tell us how to do our jobs. it's just annoying and rude, as is re-shelving the books. we have enough work to do cleaning up after ungrateful slobs like you. i hope that one day you have no choice but to work in retail, then we'll see how you enjoy it. have a nice day!
- November 10, 2007 at 9:35 PM
- Ted said...
Dear Ste: The B&N in Lincoln, Nebraska has NO science section, but has two very large, tall aisles devoted to religion and a smaller section devoted to the genre of science fiction. We found this appalling. I think the larger problem is that B&N is responding to what sells, which rarely includes academic books. You may want to investigate which communities have a science section and those that don't. We would be interested to know how corporate headquarters responds to this issue. Good luck. Best, Ted and Mary Anne
- December 27, 2007 at 10:14 AM
- Plesva, Mexilus said...
BISAC categories would be used by a publisher to send data to a trading partner such as Amazon. Their utility for bookstore shelving decisions is limited. That's why a "bookstore category" is printed on the cover of the book.
But what exactly is a "bookstore category"? It's something invented by marketing types, without reference to any standards. BISAC is an industry standard.
As a database administrator for an academic publisher, I can tell you that our marketing team is still searching for an authoritative list of "bookstore categories". Please try not to get your noses bent too far out of shape if the people who sell books for a living persist in putting books where they will sell.
Even academic publishers play this game, which is called -- biologists take note -- survival. - July 30, 2008 at 10:17 PM
- Andreas said...
B&N is like my second home. Haven't picked up a book in quite a while.
Quite an OC there are you? I wouldn't bother correcting the placement of the books or just don't really notice that much. hehe.
Wholesale Beads
http://www.beadnshop.com - October 2, 2011 at 7:59 PM
- Andreas said...
B&N is like my second home. Haven't picked up a book in quite a while.
Quite an OC there are you? I wouldn't bother correcting the placement of the books or just don't really notice that much. hehe.
Wholesale Beads
http://www.beadnshop.com - October 2, 2011 at 8:01 PM


text:
I found these rather fantastic photographs from Google's Life magazine collection. They feature some teenagers at a 'rave' on Eel Pie Island at Twickenham on a Wednesday night August 31 1960. There is practically no other information other than the photographs were taken by a Peter Hall (I'm presuming not the theatre impresario who became Sir Peter Hall).
Does anyone know anything about the parties held on the island at the time and what kind of music would they have been listening to? Was it some kind of jazz? There seems to be a sort of young scruffy beatnik sort of style going on.
Charles Mingus – Boogie Stop Shuffle
Charles Mingus – Better Git It In Your Soul
Buy Charles Mingus's Ah Um here
Peter Hall's Eel Pie Island photos are here

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Sex worker activists and allies in the global movement for sexual health, justice, and human rights celebrated as the United States recognized the basic rights of sex workers.
Last Friday, March 18, 2011, was a day of celebration for sex worker activists and allies, as well as for global advocates of sexual health, justice, and human rights. Why the celebration? The United States made public its new position that: "No one should face violence or discrimination in access to public services based on sexual orientation or their status as a person in prostitution."
The first part of this position regarding sexual orientation was not a surprise. (Despite predictable and periodic right-wing backlashes, GLBT justice movements have continued to make gains at all levels of US society, including increased federal recognition by the Obama administration that sexual orientation is not a valid litmus test for full citizenship.)
The second part of this statement, however – a commitment to uphold the human rights of all sex workers — is completely unprecedented at the federal level of the United States.
The occasion for this public statement on the part of the US was the first Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the United Nations Human Rights Council. The UPR is new process where the UN community evaluates the human rights record of each member state. Upon its first UPR review in November 2010, the US received 228 recommendations by its global peers for improving its human rights record, including recommendation #86 from member state Uruguay: "undertake awareness-raising campaigns for combating stereotypes and violence against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and [transgender people], and ensure access to public services paying attention to the special vulnerability of [sex] workers to violence and human rights abuses.[i]
On Friday, March 18, at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, the US presented its written response to each of the 228 recommendations (including the one listed at the top of this post). Additionally, Harold Koh, Legal Advisor for the US Department of State, delivered a verbal summary statement of the US commitment to human rights. Invoking the spirit of more recent US history including the civil rights movement, Koh stated that it is now "a fundamental American belief" that "society as a whole is transformed for the better through our work to protect and promote the civil and human rights of its least powerful members."
Following Koh's remarks, ten UN member state representatives were allowed to read two-minute prepared response statements, followed by statements read by ten civil society representatives. The process of getting a speaking position in this forum resembles a competitive race, with adversarial member states (such as Cuba and Iran) highly motivated to achieve a speaking slot. As a result of perseverance, luck, and sponsorship by the Sexual Rights Initiative and member group Action Canada for Population and Development, sex worker and transgender rights activist Darby Hickey[ii] was able to secure the 10th and last civil society speaking position. Below are segments from her speech:
Thank you, Mr. President. I am a sex worker and transgender rights activist from the United States. On behalf of hundreds of civil society organizations that called on the U.S. government to ensure the human rights of people engaged in sex work, I would like to both congratulate and thank the U.S. delegation for accepting recommendation #86. We believe that it is the first instance of affirmation of sex workers' rights in this forum.
Due to stigma and criminalization, sex workers — and those profiled as such — are subjected to violence and discrimination, and are often barred from necessary services and the right to equal protection under the law. State agents themselves, specifically police officers, commit physical and sexual violence against sex workers. These abuses are particularly rampant in low income, African-American and immigrant communities and also greatly affect transgender, bisexual, lesbian, and gay people. Globally, U.S. policies, such as the "anti-prostitution pledge," have negatively affected international HIV/AIDS efforts.
As part of such implementation, it is critical that the government work to systematically involve sex workers in policy decisions that affect them. Specifically, we hope to see the government eliminate federal policies that conflate sex work with human trafficking, investigate and prevent human rights abuses perpetrated by state agents against sex workers, and examine the impact of criminalization on our communities. Protecting the human rights of sex workers is also connected with broader efforts to ensure sexual and reproductive rights and address the problems of the criminal justice system in the U.S.
We are deeply appreciative of the respect for, openness to, and engagement with civil society that the U.S. government has shown throughout this UPR process. We stand ready to work with the administration to implement this recommendation and others.
This first UPR has brought about an unprecedented opportunity for dialogue between government and civil society around issues of human rights. At the close of the United States' UPR process we face a unique opportunity – a global mandate – to begin implementing human rights principles into policies around sex work and human trafficking. In his concluding statement to the UN on Friday, Harold Koh stated that "this is an ongoing process leading to concrete policy and self conscious change." We (A broad coalition of sex work activists and researchers in the fields of sexual and reproductive health, human rights, and justice) are excited and prepared to begin implementing these principles into policy.
Useful Links:
- Archived video of Darby Hickey's speech, as well as that of Harold Koh and others available here. http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/archive.asp?go=110318#pm2
(UN Human Rights Council, Sixteenth session, at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. 36th Plenary Meeting, Archived video, Friday 18 March 2011. )
- "Human Rights for All"( http://www.humanrightsforall.info/), is the group of organizations and individuals (including myself) who organized on behalf of recommendation #86. Included on this site are primary documents and evidence including: the original UPR report (written by members of Best Practices Policy Project and Desiree Alliance), a policy brief for the US state department, and a call to action with dozens of stakeholder signatures.
- To see another recent posts about sex workers and the UPR, see: http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2011/03/15/for-sex-workers-recommendation-86-will-go-down-in-history/
i The translation of Uruguay's recommendation uses the term "transsexuals." "sexual workers." In our advocacy response to this recommendation we inserted the terms "transgender people" and "sex workers" which more accurately reflects terms used in the United States.
ii Darby Hickey is a member of the Best Practices Policy Project.


text:
BubblesIntroductionBubbles is a game in which you fire bubbles with the aim of creating connected clusters of three or more of the same type in order to clear the board.GameplayThe goal of the game is to beat each level as quickly as possible by clearing the board of all bubbles. Bubbles are removed from the board when a cluster of three of more of the same type is formed. Any bubbles connected below a removed cluster are also removed (note that they must be only connected to the removed cluster; bubbles connected to a removed cluster and other bubbles at the same time are not removed). The game is over when any bubbles on the board extend below the bottom line. To make things more difficult, the entire board is shifted down every time a certain number of shots have been fired. Points are awarded depending on how quickly the level was completed.Keys
Screenshotsback to PluginIndexCategoryPlugin: Fire bubbles to clear the board [Recorder, Ondio,H10, H100, H300, iPod 1G2G, iPod 4G, iPod Color, iPod Mini, iPod Nano, iPod Video, iAudio M5, iAudio X5, Gigabeat, Sansa e200, Sansa c200, Sansa Fuze, MR-100] r18 - 02 Apr 2021 - 20:46:07 - UnknownUser
Copyright © by the contributing authors.


text:
Effective Date: 3/1/2014
A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may consist of the witness's own testimony. This rule does not apply to a witness's expert testimony under Rule 703.
Rule 602 was amended, effective March 1, 1990; March 1, 2014.
This rule deals with the competency of a witness, but only in a most basic sense. The requirement of personal knowledge is deeply embedded in the common law.
The rule states that a witness may testify "if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding" that the witness has personal knowledge. This gives the trial judge the power to reject testimony if the judge finds, as a matter of law, that no reasonable juror could believe that the witness perceived the event about which the witness is testifying.
The last sentence is intended to avoid any confusion which might otherwise arise concerning the relative requirements of this rule and Rule 703. This rule is subordinate to Rule 703, which does not require that an expert opinion be based on the expert's own perception.
Rule 602 was amended, effective March 1, 1990. The amendments are technical in nature and no substantive change is intended.
Rule 602 was amended, effective March 1, 2014, in response to the December 1, 2011, revision of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.
SOURCES: Joint Procedure Committee Minutes of April 26-27, 2012, page 22; March 24-25, 1988, page 12; December 3, 1987, page 15; April 8, 1976, page 26. Fed.R.Ev. 602; Rule 602, SBAND proposal.


text:
Shagrath is well known from his band Dimmu Borgir, but not everybody knows that there's a different side to this guy: his love for dirty Rock and Roll. This was long an unexposed side to him. During the summer of '04 he summoned his long time friends Lex Icon of The Kovenant and Luna of Ashes to Ashes, respectively on drums and bass guitar. Suddenly they were a trio. During months of rehearsing and beer drinking, the band CHROME DIVISION took shape. Then came the task of finding the right vocalist. They needed a front man with a real in-your-face attitude. Several guys were considered, but none could meet the demands. Then Luna contacted Eddie Guz, from the rock'n roll band The Carburetors. January '05 this sneering bulldog entered the rehearsing place, and he fitted the band like a glove. Furthermore he was the only one who had long time experience in the field of rock'n roll. On this point they were close to perfect. It was only missing that last ingredient. And for the extra hot spice Ricky Black was dragged in. And from day one he delivered amazing guitar bending solos. From this point it was evident that CHROME DIVISION was to be more than just a side project. From now on they were like a force, spawning stripped down groovy rock'n roll, with a primitive attitude. Strongly determined to go their own ways. To put it short, the labeled their music: Doomsday Rock n' Roll. A slight drawback was in summer '05 when Lex Icon had to leave the band. No hard feelings, but there were circumstances that made him unable to rehearse. However the replacement was imminent. Tony from the singular band Minas Tirith, came pronto. He's a steady and deadly precise drummer. So the band continued even stronger. These five Norwegian road bandits, had the ability to grasp the finer elements of their influences and mould them into their own diverse sound.
After releasing the highly successful albums; "Doomsday Rock N` Roll" (2006) and "Booze, Broads, & Beelzebub" (2008) the band were held back from entering the live scene due to immense activity with the members other bands, so it remained a dormant volcano of pure energy.
In February 2009, however, an offer to play the Winterfire Festival in Germany came along and the band were set to make their very first international appearance. Unfortunately just 3 weeks prior to the show, Eddie Guz had to cancel his participation. Really wanting to do the show, the band contacted Pål Mathiesen (Athera of Susperia) and pitched the idea for him to step in and replace Eddie at the festival. Knowing little to nothing about the material, he managed to rehearse the whole set in the limited time and the performance was praised the best act of the whole festival by German media.
Pål was later that year offered the permanent position as vocalist due to Eddie not being able to commit to the band`s future plans. Pål took the stage name Shady Blue. They went on to record "Third Round Knockout" (2011) and played yet another festival in Germany and a headline show in London. Luna, upon becoming a father, decided this was to be his last album with the band and left on friendly terms giving up the bass slot to long time session-guitarist Ogee. Ricky Black was releaved of his duties shortly after due to his lack of commitment to the band`s new found level of activity. A replacement was hunted high and low, bearing in mind the huge talent that had been lost. The search was not easy but when Damage Karlsen was one minute into his audition at the CD headquarters he had already nailed it down by himself. An even bigger talent for the lead guitars was brought into the fold.
The band is heavily into the creation of their fourth album which will be something the world would never expect. A perfect blend of dirty rock, stoner and even elements of metal. An intense and highly creative album is in the making and will hit the streets this year. Chrome Division is set to play more shows this year than ever combined in their existence, and will become highly active on the live scene in the future as well. A new era has begun.
Long live DOOMSDAY ROCK N` ROLL!
SHAGRATH (Dimmu Borgir) SHADY BLUE (Susperia) TONY WHITE (Minas Tirith) DAMAGE KARLSEN (ex-Breed) OGEE (Mortiis, Shot at Dawn)


text:
Only about one in 10 consumers participating in debt-settlement programs actually ends up debt-free in the promised period of time.
Debt settlement companies claim that they can significantly reduce someones debt for just pennies on the dollar. And desperate debtors are looking for a quick fix to a problem that they have spent years creating. They want the phone calls and letters to stop. They want to get rid of the stress they are experiencing.
And so they want to believe — need to trust — the advertising from debt-settlement companies. An online ad for one firm promises that "if you owe $30,000, you could resolve your debt in as little as 24 to 48 months." The statement comes with a fine-print caveat saying that, including fees, clients still end up paying as much as 75 percent of what they owe. And there is no guarantee the program will work.
There you have it. Nuking the majority of your debt away in short order is just a pipe dream for most people.
Only about one in 10 consumers participating in debt-settlement programs actually ends up debt-free in the promised period of time, according to a consumer alert issued recently by the nonprofit National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.
Debt-settlement companies promise to act on your behalf to negotiate with your creditors to reduce your debts. Typically, customers are told to stop paying their bills and instead send money to the debt-relief firm, which holds on to the money with the intention of offering creditors a lump-sum offer for less than what's owed.
"Bombarded with slick radio and Web advertising falsely promising a smooth road to being debt-free in a short period of time, these companies prey on the most desperate victims of the economic downturn," said Ed Boltz, a North Carolina bankruptcy lawyer and incoming president of the consumer bankruptcy association. "These particularly vulnerable consumers usually end up getting sued, stuck with outrageous fees, more deeply in debt, and far worse off in terms of their credit score."
One of the biggest problems with debt-settlement programs is that they encourage consumers to default on their debts, Boltz said.
Let's look at two cases of failed debt-settlement plans, provided by the association.
The people: A Florida couple with about $60,000 in credit card debt and a California retiree with $79,000 in bills.
The program: The debt-settlement company told the Florida couple that they needed to pay $31,200, including the firm's fees, to free themselves from their debt — a savings of $28,800. The firm took an upfront fee of $6,900 and started collecting monthly payments of first $460 and then $230. The couple couldn't afford to keep up the payments and never got any debt settlement.
A 77-year-old Californian said he was watching television and saw a commercial for a debt-settlement company claiming it could reduce his debt by 50 percent. The company began taking $1,800 a month out of his bank account. "As I started reading the contract, I realized I would have to pay 15 percent of the gross [debt] amount or close to $12,000 upfront out of the $1,800 before settling any debt," the retiree said during a teleconference.
He ended up paying the company $25,200. Not one of his debts was settled.
Federal rules put in place two years ago aimed at reining in bad players in the industry now make it illegal for debt-relief services to charge upfront fees. Companies that sell their services over the telephone can't get paid until they successfully settle or reduce a customer's credit card or other unsecured debt. The companies have to make specific disclosures to potential customers — how long it will take to get results, how much the service will cost and the potential negative consequences that could result from seeking debt relief. The firms are also prohibited from misrepresenting what they can do for debtors, in particular the percentage of debt that is typically erased.
The Federal Trade Commission recently charged an Ohio company and its owner with fraudulently claiming on 17 Web sites that consumers could quickly get out of debt if they used several debt-settlement companies to which they referred people. The company's owner agreed to a $390,000 settlement.
If you're thinking about debt settlement, go to www.ftc.gov and search for "Debt Relief Services." Read the advisory by the consumer bankruptcy association at www.nacba.org.
The consumer alert may seem self-serving coming from bankruptcy attorneys, but the message is nonetheless important. A quick fix to get out of debt could end up causing you more financial pain and stress.
Via Washington Post


text:
Utah man indicted in theft of dinosaur footprints
A Utah man has been indicted on federal charges of stealing a fossilized dinosaur footprint from the Jurassic period.
The U.S. attorney's office in Utah announced Wednesday that a grand jury returned the indictment against 35-year-old Jared Ehlers of Moab. He is facing up to 20 years in prison on the most serious of four counts.
Authorities in southeast Utah say the three-toed ancient track was pried last month from the sandstone on the Hell's Revenge Trail in the Sand Flats Recreation Area near Moab.
Messages at Ehlers' house were not immediately returned. It's unknown if he has an attorney yet.
Utah Bureau of Land Management District paleontologist Rebecca Hunt-Foster says the dinosaur tracks are 190 million years old. She says they are one-of-a-kind tracks that don't have a price.
© 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.


text:
MusicRadar has seen some odd musical trinkets in its time, but Craig Dorety's (aka komega) 1000 year egg has got to be one of the most curious.
Constructed from an antique paper Easter egg that belonged to his grandmother and designed to look like an ancient Chinese artefact, this oval instrument contains a white noise generator and an FM radio transmitter. On the outside are light-sensitive photo cells and two metal touchpoints that enable the 'player' to turn the white noise into proper tones.
There's also a laser-engraved box involved - it's probably best if you watch Craig's demo video in which he explains how everything works.
Although the egg can indeed be used to make sounds, we're not sure how musically useful they might be. Still, you get the feeling that producing a practical piece of hardware was never really the point…
(Via Create Digital Music)


text:
Superman onesie pervert avoids jail
And he had previously taken photographs of another vulnerable sleeping girl whose clothing he had deliberately moved so he could get the indecent shots he wanted.
A judge told Leon Ridgeway that his online research "indicates a degree of planning and the depths to which you were prepared to go to satisfy your sexual urges."
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdRidgeway had denied the allegations against him but after expert evidence showed his online searches while at the hospital he dramatically changed his plea last month and broke down in tears.
Liverpool Crown Court heard yesterday that on May 1 last year Ridgeway was at the Wigan Royal Albert and Edward Infirmary overnight with his young step-child. A 14-year-old girl was in the same ward suffering from an eating disorder.
During the night he repeatedly peered through the hospital curtains surrounding her bed and searched on the internet for 'sleep assault' and 'night time assault.'
Ridgeway eventually went into her cubicle and lifted the blanket covering her stomach, believing she was asleep, but when she opened her eyes he left.
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdSarah Holt, prosecuting, said the girl, frightened by his behaviour, sent a Facebook message to a friend for help and she suggested she write a note for staff.
She did this on a paper towel and handed it to a nurse who knew who she meant as Ridgeway had been aware of him walking around through the night. The social services and the police were notified.
His mobile phone was seized and it was found that on eight separate occasions he had searched on the internet for "sleep assault" and "sister sleep assault." It was also found to have four photographs on it of a 15-year-old girl in which she was asleep and her underwear had been moved to expose her bra and her pubic area in two of them.
Ridgeway, of Glebe Street, Leigh, told police that someone else must have been responsible for the photographs on his phone, which was used by others.
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad"He said he had never seen the indecent photographs before and thought they were an absolute disgrace." Ridgeway admitted searching porn sites but said he had never heard of 'sleep assault.'
Ridgeway admitted attempting to sexually assault the hospital patient, sexually assaulting the other girl and two offences of taking indecent photographs.
Judge Clement Goldstone, the Recorder of Liverpool, told him, "The facts of this case make troubling and very unusual reading."
He said, "You are a man who has to face serious sexual issues about your attraction to young girls. Until recently you were in denial about what motivated you and about that attraction."
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdHe pointed out he had only pleaded guilty when an expert had destroyed the "last vestiges of your defence" and he had been in a state of denial but there was now hope that "depravity had been nipped in the bud."
The judge him the community sentence he was passing was in reality a suspended sentence. He made a three year community order with attendance on the stringent Northumbria Sex Offenders Group programme and 40 days rehabilitation activity.
Short haired Ridgeway, who was wearing a grey sweat shirt and jeans, was also ordered to carry out 180 hours unpaid work and for the next six months is subject to a 7 - 7 am curfew with an electronic tag.
Ridgeway has to sign the Sex Offenders Register for five years
Katy Appleton, defending, said that Ridgeway, who has no similar previous convictions, was genuinely remorseful. "He is now separated from his wife because of these proceedings," she said.


text:
Target Corp. Tuesday defended the use of its new freedom to spend money on political campaigns as employees and gay organizations criticized a $150,000 donation that will help a Minnesota GOP gubernatorial candidate who opposes gay marriage.
Chief Executive Officer Gregg Steinhafel assured employees at the company's Minneapolis headquarters in an e-mail that the discount retailer's support of the gay community is "unwavering." He said employees, some gay, raised concerns that the money is helping state Rep. Tom Emmer, a fiery conservative who is his party's likely nominee for governor.
Target's headache illustrates the potential risks for businesses that seek to take advantage of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that threw out parts of a 63-year-old law that prohibited campaign donations from company funds. The ruling changed regulations in about half the states, but the Target donation in Minnesota is among the first major new corporate moves to come to light.
Target's money went to MN Forward, a group staffed by former insiders from outgoing Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty's administration. MN Forward is running TV ads supporting Emmer. Steinhafel's e-mail said Target's political donations are intended to support business objectives such as job creation and economic growth.
He said the company doesn't have a social agenda or necessarily agree with all the positions of candidates it supports. "Let me be very clear," he said, "Target's support of the GLBT community is unwavering, and inclusiveness remains a core value of our company."
Monica Meyer, the interim head of the gay rights group OutFront Minnesota, said the gay community has long viewed Target as a supportive employer, and many are surprised by the large donation to the pro-Emmer group.
"A lot of people feel betrayed by this place where everybody goes to shop and you get to see them at Pride and you feel good that you're supporting a corporation that's giving back to the community," she said.
As of Tuesday, Target was the largest single donor to MN Forward, which had raised more than $1 million from industry trade groups and companies including Best Buy Co., Pentair Inc., Hubbard Broadcasting Inc., Davisco Foods International Inc. and Polaris Industries Inc.
Best Buy spokeswoman Susan Busch said the company informed employees of its $100,000 donation early Tuesday and received only a handful of phone calls about it.
OutFront Minnesota posted an open letter urging Target to take back its money from MN Forward. Two new "Boycott Target" Facebook groups together had more than 1,000 followers by mid-afternoon Tuesday, with some people posting business phone numbers for Target and Steinhafel, who individually also gave Emmer $2,000, the maximum donation under state law.
Similar corporate help for political candidates could be happening outside public view in other affected states with weaker disclosure laws, said Paul Ryan, an attorney at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center in Washington. Some businesses also may reserve their new spending rights for federal races, where the stakes are higher and there is little disclosure.
"Just the threat of being able to spend unlimited money out of corporations' coffers is a significant change in the rules of the game," Ryan said.
MN Forward's money could help Emmer overcome a financial disadvantage with his Democratic rivals. Emmer has raised less than $800,000 this year, compared with nearly $1 million for Democratic House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher. Two other Democrats, former U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton and former legislator Matt Entenza, together have put in a combined $6.9 million, mostly their own money.
Independent expenditure groups on the left have spent more than $1 million attacking Emmer on TV.
The contrast between Emmer's outspoken conservatism and Target's moderate image is striking. Emmer lauds Arizona's strict approach to illegal immigration and once advocated chemical castration for sex offenders. Target is known in Minnesota for donating to public school programs, food pantries and the annual Twin Cities Gay Pride Festival.
As of July 19, MN Forward had spent $200,000 on TV ads promoting Emmer as "the fighter Minnesota needs."
He will face the winner of the Aug. 10 Democratic primary and an Independence Party candidate. Pawlenty chose not to seek a third term and is instead exploring a 2012 presidential bid.
Mike Dean, who heads the advocacy group Common Cause Minnesota, urged businesses and unions to refrain from spending on campaigns this year. "Just the reputation damage that this is doing to the corporations that have given should be a compelling case of why these corporations should not give," Dean said Tuesday at a news conference.
The Supreme Court ruling left in place state prohibitions against companies giving directly to the candidates. The company money can go to independent groups supporting the candidates.
Several shoppers at the SuperTarget in the St. Paul suburb of Roseville — all of them self-identified as Democrats — weren't happy to hear about the chain's political involvement. Viki Karr, 50, said she would like to keep politics out of her shopping and would "definitely" not shop somewhere that supports the GOP.
Pat Mackey, 67, also of Richfield, said she wasisappointed in Target.
"I think it is going to drown out the $25, $5 contributions of the average American, and we can't let that happen," she said.
Across town at a Target in Edina, even one Republican-leaning voter, 32-year-old administrative assistant Robin Liebl, said she didn't like what she heard about Target's giving.
"If I ever get wind of a company giving money to somebody I did not agree with, I would stop supporting them as much as I can," Liebl said.


text:
On March 1, 1781, Maryland becomes the 13th and final state to ratify the Articles of Confederation, almost three years after the official deadline given by Congress of March 10, 1778.
The Continental Congress drafted the Article of Confederation in a disjointed process that began in 1776. The same issues that would later dog the Constitutional Convention of 1787 befuddled the Congress during the drafting. Large states wanted votes to be proportional according to population, while small states wanted to continue with the status quo of one vote per state. Northern states wished to count the southern states' slave population when determining the ratio for how much funding each state would provide for Congressional activities, foremost the war. States without western land claims wanted those with claims to yield them to Congress.
In November 1777, Congress put the Articles before the states for ratification. As written, the Articles made the firm promise that "Each state retains its sovereignty." Western claims remained in the hands of the individual states and states' support to Congress was determined based only on their free population. Each state carried only one vote.
Virginia was the only state to ratify the Articles by the 1778 deadline. Most states wished to place conditions on ratification, which Congress refused to accept. Ten further states ratified during the summer of 1778, but small states with big neighbors and no land claims—Delaware, New Jersey and Maryland—still refused. Maryland held out the longest, only ratifying the Articles after Virginia relinquished its claims on land north of the Ohio River to Congress. The Articles finally took effect on March 1, 1781.
The problematic Articles of Confederation remained the law of the land for only eight years before the Constitutional Convention rejected them in favor of a new, more centralized form of federal government. They crafted the current U.S. Constitution, which took effect in 1789, giving the federal government greater authority over the states and creating a bicameral legislature.


text:
Russell Brand Files for Divorce from Katy Perry
Russell Brand Files for Divorce from Katy Perry
Russell Brand has filed for divorce from Katy Perry ... TMZ has learned.
In the docs, filed in L.A., Brand cites "irreconcilable differences." The two were married Oct. 23, 2010 in India. They have no kids.
The divorce docs say there are "community property assets" -- it's a sign there might not be a prenup, or if there is one it doesn't cover all of the earnings and other assets they accumulated.
The docs do not give a date the couple separated.
Russell has released a statement, claiming, "Sadly, Katy and I are ending our marriage. I'll always adore her and I know we'll remain friends."
Russell proposed to Katy in India on New Year's Eve 2009 -- nearly two years ago ... to the day.
Sources had told TMZ the couple was having problems, evidenced by the fact that they spent Christmas apart and neither was wearing a wedding ring.
Although it's not 100%, based on what we now know it appears Brand may have blindsided Perry by filing the divorce petition.
Russell appeared on "Ellen" just this month, slamming divorce rumors (below) -- claiming, "I'm really happily married ... I'm married to Katy. Perpetually, until death do us part was the pledge. I'm still alive."


text:
CSIS Events:
Live in 2 hoursLive in 3 daysLive in 3 daysLive in 3 daysUpcomingUpcoming
Exporting Autocracy
CSIS Americas director Ryan C. Berg and Henry Ziemer analyze China's role in democratic backsliding across Latin America and the Caribbean and outline a series of recommendations for the United States to advance a democracy-first strategy in the hemisphere.
Report by Ryan C. Berg and Henry Ziemer — February 15, 2024
Kari A. Bingen and Heather Williams in The New York Times: Is This a Sputnik Moment?
Commentary by Kari A. Bingen and Heather Williams — February 17, 2024
Seth G. Jones in The Wall Street Journal: Ditching Ukraine Would Help China and Iran
Commentary by Seth G. Jones — February 21, 2024
Fracturing Solidarity: The Grain Trade Dispute between Ukraine and the European Union
Critical Questions by Emma Dodd and Caitlin Welsh — February 20, 2024
Assessing the War in Ukraine
Transcript — February 14, 2024
Featured Event
Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland: The Two-Year Anniversary of Russia's Full-Scale Invasion of Ukraine
Presented by Europe, Russia, and Eurasia ProgramFebruary 22, 2024 • 2:30 – 3:15 pm ESTFeatured Analysis: 2024 Global Forecast
2024 Global Forecast: A World Dividing
Amid great power competition and conflicts raging around the world, the 2024 Global Forecast—A World Dividing—offers insights from dozens of scholars on security, technology, geoeconomics, alliances, and the battle for influence in the Global South.
Digital Report — January 25, 2024
2024 Global Forecast: The China Challenge
Digital Report by Victor Cha, Gregory C. Allen, Scott Kennedy, Seth G. Jones, Kari A. Bingen, and Heather Williams, Tom Karako, Bonny Lin, Jude Blanchette, Charles Edel, Christopher B. Johnstone, Nicholas Szechenyi, Lily McElwee, Daniel F. Runde, Craig Cohen, Alex Kisling — January 25, 2024
2024 Global Forecast: Winning the Economic and Tech Race
Digital Report by James Andrew Lewis, Emily Benson, William Alan Reinsch, Sujai Shivakumar, Joseph Majkut, Ben Cahill, Ilaria Mazzocco, Craig Cohen, and Alex Kisling — January 30, 2024
2024 Global Forecast: Conflict Zones
Digital Report by Mark F. Cancian, Max Bergmann, and Maria Snegovaya, Romina Bandura, Kathleen McInnis, Elizabeth Hoffman, Eliot A. Cohen, Daniel Byman, Jon B. Alterman, Natasha Hall, Emily Harding, Craig Cohen, Alex Kisling — February 2, 2024
2024 Global Forecast: Vying for Influence in the Global South
Digital Report by Michelle Strucke, J. Stephen Morrison, Noam Unger, Caitlin Welsh, Richard M. Rossow, Gregory B. Poling, Ryan C. Berg, Mvemba Phezo Dizolele, Craig Cohen, and Alex Kisling — February 7, 2024
Upcoming Events
Live in 2 hoursIn PersonWebcastDelivering for the Warfighter: The Importance of Executing Space Acquisition Programs
Hosted by Aerospace Security ProjectFebruary 23, 2024 • 10:00 – 11:00 am ESTLive in 3 daysWebcastSecurity in the Horn of Africa: A Discussion with Somalia's Deputy Prime Minister
Hosted by Africa ProgramFebruary 26, 2024 • 9:00 – 10:00 am ESTConference
PONI 2024 Virtual Winter Conference
Hosted by Project on Nuclear IssuesFebruary 26, 2024 • 10:00 am – 4:30 pm ESTLive in 3 daysWebcastTransatlantic Trade and Climate: A Strategic Roadmap for 2024
Hosted by Project on Trade and TechnologyFebruary 26, 2024 • 1:00 – 1:45 pm ESTDigital Reports
Prev NextExecutive Education Courses
Decoding D.C.: Policy, Power, and People
CSIS Headquarters or VirtualGlobal Foresight: Preparing for Future Trends
CSIS Headquarters or VirtualDriving Economic Growth: The Role of Development Finance Institutions
CSIS Headquarters or VirtualThe Latest from CSIS
Defense and Security
Two Years Later: LAC and Russia's War in Ukraine
Critical Questions by Ryan C. Berg, Christopher Hernandez-Roy, Juliana Rubio, Rubi Bledsoe, Henry Ziemer, and Nathaniel Laske — February 22, 2024
Energy and Sustainability
What China, Germany, and Texas Tell Us about Capacity Adequacy
Commentary by Cy McGeady — February 21, 2024
Human Rights
Ukraine's Rapid Digitalization: Human Rights Risks and Opportunities in a Postwar Environment
Report by Marti Flacks, Caitlin Chin-Rothmann, Lauren Burke, Julia Brock, and Iryna Tiasko — February 14, 2024
American Innovation
When AI Helps Generate Inventions, Who Is the Inventor?
Commentary by Andrei Iancu and Rama Elluru — February 22, 2024
Transnational Threats
Ukraine in the Balance: A Battlefield Update on the War in Ukraine
Transcript — February 22, 2024
Humanitarian Assistance
The CommonHealth Live! "WHO Senior Advisor Dr. Scott Dowell on the Global Health Emergency Corps"
Transcript — February 13, 2024
Nuclear Issues
The Uncertain Future of U.S.-Russia Arms Control
Critical Questions by Nicholas Adamopoulos — February 14, 2024


text:
Five North Korean players test positive
FRANKFURT, Germany -- North Korea officials blamed traditional musk deer gland medicine used after a lightning strike for five positive tests for steroids at the Women's World Cup, the biggest soccer doping scandal at a major tournament in 17 years.
After two players were caught during the tournament this month, FIFA president Sepp Blatter said Saturday the world soccer governing body took the unprecedented step of testing the rest of the North Korean squad and found three more positive results.
"This is a shock," Blatter said at a news conference. "We are confronted with a very, very bad case of doping and it hurts."
A North Korean delegation told Blatter and the head of FIFA's medical committee on Saturday that the steroids were accidentally taken with traditional Chinese medicines based on the deer glands.
"The North Korean officials said they didn't use it to improve performance. They said they had a serious lightning accident with several players injured and they gave it as therapy," said Michel D'Hooghe, chief of FIFA's medical committee. "It is not systemic, because not all of the players took it. We would have found it with the others too."
The case will be taken up by FIFA's disciplinary committee. Players face a ban of up to two years.
In late June, Colombia's reserve goalkeeper Yineth Varon was provisionally suspended for failing an out-of-competition test before the World Cup. The Colombian Football Federation said she had hormonal treatment that led to a failed drug test, the first doping case in the history of the Women's World Cup.
FIFA annually spends some $30 million on 35,000 doping tests. Despite the cases at the Women's World Cup, "doping really is a marginal, fringe phenomenon in football," Blatter said.
The last doping case at a major event came at the men's 1994 World Cup in the United States, when Diego Maradona was kicked out after testing positive for a cocktail of banned substances.
FIFA has already met with a North Korean delegation and heard arguments that the steroids were accidentally taken to treat players after a lightning strike on June 8 during a training camp in North Korea.
Defenders Song Jong Sun and Jong Pok Sim tested positive for steroids after North Korea's first two group games and were suspended for the last match. The team was eliminated in the first round after losses to the United States and Sweden and a draw with Colombia.
Blatter said the North Korean federation "wrote to us and they presented their excuses. They said that a lightning strike was responsible for this."
The names of the three other players would only be made public at a later stage, FIFA said.
FIFA investigators who discovered evidence of doping in the North Korean samples were in uncharted territory. Experts from the World Anti-Doping Agency were called in to confirm the breach of doping rules.
It was very complex," FIFA's chief medical officer Jiri Dvorak said, especially because the kind of steroids had "never before appeared and never before been determined."
The experts concluded there were "positive findings of an unknown origin," Dvorak said.
After the first two cases were discovered, doping officials went unannounced to North Korea's last match. They declared the two players provisionally suspended, and 15 minutes before the end of play, said all players would be tested.
"They were surprised but they cooperated," Dvorak said. The testing took until 3 a.m. and a few hours later, the whole delegation was on its way back to North Korea.
Dvorak said the team's medical officer "gave us (a) sample that she described as classical or traditional medicine that is often used in North Korea."
After extensive testing that lasted until late Friday, "we can really say with far-reaching confidence that these steroids were the result of this so-callled Chinese traditional medicine," Dvorak said.
He added the musk deer gland extract "is not part of the world of doping. It is really the first case in which this has been discovered."
The gland in question comes from musk deer living in a large swath of Asia from Siberia to North Korea. The hairy gland is usually cut open to extract a liquid that is used for medical purposes.
"There is a whole industry linked to that to produce these medical products," D'Hooghe said.
Doping officials have been concerned about such naturally occurring substances in recent years. During the run-up to the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, FIFA's concerns focused on African plants that could give players an unfair advantage by providing energy or helping to heal muscle injuries.
North Korean coach Kim Kwang Min said after their first match against the U.S. that "more than five" players were sent to the hospital. Goalkeeper Hong Myong Hui, four defenders and some of the midfielders were the players most affected, Kim said.
"The physicians actually said the players were not capable of playing in the tournament," Kim said through an interpreter.
Dvorak said the information was still sketchy.
"We saw some pictures with ambulances and saw that some players were taken from the pitch, but that is all we have," he said.
FIFA also got information from North Korea about the initial hospital treatment of the players and "this very first report did not include the traditional Chinese medicine," Dvorak said.
The World Cup ends Sunday with the final between the United States and Japan.
Copyright 2011 by The Associated Press
- Contact Us
- Corrections
- Daily Line